Journal articles on the topic 'Galicia (Poland and Ukraine) – Ethnic relations – History'

The Lviv daily “Dilo”, as well as the Ukrainian press in Galicia, Bukovina, Volyn and Transcarpathia in the interwar period, could not keep a way from the numerous and systematic facts of Ukrainophobia and immediately responded to the form available to it, mainly as digest and translations of foreign publications about Ukrainians and Ukrainian ethnic land. Thirties of the Twentieth century entered the Ukrainian history under the sign of Polish “pacification” in Eastern Galicia (there were also the petitions of Ukrainian and British representations to the League of Nations), artificially created famine and genocide in Soviet Ukraine, the Bolshevik terror (not only against the national Ukrainian intellectuals, but also against the Ukrainian leadership of the Communist Party of the Bolsheviks), the German propaganda concerning the prospects of independent Ukraine and other significant phenomena, which formed together the basis of the "Ukrainian problem". All this in general was reflected by the European press (Great Britain, Germany, France, Switzerland, Belgium, Austria, Italy) and the US press, Canada, Japan. At the same time, from the standpoint of advocacy and sympathy, there was hardly any publication in the press of Czechoslovakia, Poland, Romania (except for Ukrainian-language editions), in the Soviet periodicals, however the governments of these countries were interested in further weakening and leveling of Ukrainian ethnic, mental, religious, historical and other factors that could cement Ukrainians nationally. Keywords: magazine “Dilo” (Lviv), interethnic relations, Bukovyna, Galychyna, interwar period

The complicated and violent interactions between Ukrainians and Poles during and after World War II have been the subject of competing Ukrainian and Polish historical interpretations. This article sifts through the historical evidence to determine why Ukrainian and Polish memories of that period are so much at odds. The fate of the contested territories of Eastern Galicia and Volhynia was decided ultimately by the Soviet Union, which imposed new borders on Poland. Once those borders had been established, the transfer of Poles from the newly enlarged Soviet Ukraine and the forced removal of Ukrainians from eastern Poland consolidated an “ethnically cleansed” post-war order.

The creation of an Austrian province, titled “The Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria” (“with the Grand Duchy of Cracow” added later) was the result of the first partition of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in 1772. The addition of this territory to the already imposing number of Habsburg's realms was ostensibly based on the dubious claim of the Hungarian kings to sovereignty over the medieval Ruthenian (Ukrainian) realm of Galicia and Volhynia. Under the subsequent Polish rule, the southern part of this duchy was organized as thewojewództwo ruskie(Ruthenian [Ukrainian] Province), which was one of the several provinces in the so-calledZiemie Ruskie(Ruthenian Lands) of the Commonwealth, or rather of theKorona(Kingdom of Poland),vis-à-visthe Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Galicia as an Austrian creation included small parts of the adjacent Ruthenian provinces of Podilia (Podole), Volhynia and Belz, (i.e. Galicia proper), and in the west also the province of Cracow, with territorial enclaves, really medieval relics, such as the “Duchy of Oświȩcim [Auschwitz]” and “Duchy of Zator” (i.e. the non-historical “Western Galicia”). Under Austrian rule, Galicia became a common home for Ukrainians (officially called Ruthenians) in the eastern counties and Poles in the western counties. Many Poles lived in Galicia proper. The Polish or Latin-Polish culture deeply influenced the Ukrainian population. However, it stubbornly, though inarticulately, maintained a sense of ethnic community with the Ukrainians who lived under the Russian imperial rule. A prominent Polish historian (and for more than a decade President of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Cracow), Stanislaw Smolka, ascertains the “common features” of the “ethno-historical indivudiuality” known in Polish history as Ruś (Ruthenia) which had been “dormant through the centuries but never moribund [obumarla].” This Ruthenia “at the present attempts to find for herself a new distinguishing name and wants it to be ‘Ukraine'.” He also determines “the historical continuity” in the past of the old Ruthenia of Yaroslav and Monomakh and the “Ruthenian Lands” of the Commonwealth.

In recent years, the interest of both the general public and the scientific community to get better acquainted with the culture of national minorities in Ukraine has been growing. Therefore, intelligence becomes relevant, which covers the processes of development of cultures of these minorities and actualizes the directions of further research in this area. One such minority is the Jewish minority. Jews belong to one of the oldest ethnic minorities in Ukraine, known since ancient times. The number of Jews declined sharply in Ukraine in the middle of the last century, due to the policy of extermination by the German Nazis during World War II, and continued to decline during the independence of Ukraine due to the departure of a large number of Jews to their ancient homeland. territory of the State of Israel. However, in the new post-Soviet conditions of an independent Ukrainian state, the Jewish community has better opportunities to develop its national culture. The purpose of the article and our task was to review the personal fund of the economist and researcher of the history of the Jewish community of eastern Poland and western Ukraine, which makes up the historical and biographical background. Archival research methods were used in compiling the descriptions of J. Honigsman’s fund, and a biographical method was used in compiling the biographical information about the scientist. Autobiographies, personal documents, memoirs, articles about the scientist, as well as correspondence were used for the analysis. General historical research methods and the historical source method were useful. The described archive of J. Honigsman can be useful first of all to economists who study the economy of Western Ukraine in the second half of the XIX – early XX centuries. There are some values of his work on the life and death (Holocaust) of Jews during the German occupation of Galicia, as well as documents relating to the life of the Jewish community in Lviv after Ukraine gained independence in 1991. Keywords: Honigsman, Jewish literature, old prints, manuscripts, B’nai Brith International, reviews, ghetto, Ukrainian-Jewish relations, correspondence.

The historical region of Galicia was appropriated successively by the Habsburg Imperium, Independent Poland, the USSR, Hitler Germany, and Communist Poland and the USSR. It is presently divided in to two by the border between Poland and Ukraine, the EU and the belt of post-Soviet states. Its multicultural past has been eradicated through genocide, ethnic cleansing, and deportations by Hitler and Stalin as well as various interethnic conflicts between Polish and Ukrainian nationalists. From 1989 on, pilgrims, survivors, root tourists, and also religious, political, and community activists have started to rediscover it. Poles, Ukrainians, Jews, as well as Russian and Western travelers cross the borders to remember their childhood places, the locus of their deportation or survival, or the cradle of the family history, or just a province lost. Their expectations are partly met, or sometimes ignored, by municipal and regional authorities, travel agencies, private businesses, and locals, who all contribute to form a network of touristic infrastructures. The memory of WW2 and of the subsequent deportations looms large in the personal agendas of tourists and community activists. However, Poland and Ukraine envision local, historical, and identity tourism in the region variously. While Western Ukraine tries to convey a strongly nationalistic and monoethnic image of the region, Poland, under the influence of EU guidelines and subsidies, has opened to a more multicultural and postmodern concept. Transnational tourism across the border participates in the reassertion of conflicting national identities.

The article deals with today’s ethnic-cultural tensions and how they connect with the history of Poland and Ukraine and current diplomatic relations. The article overviews the problematic development of the current nationalist movement in Poland and its relationship with the “Center-Right” government, which was formed after the election of the President of the Republic of Poland Andrzej Duda. On the example of the closure of the Polish consulates in Ukraine after the 2017 incident with a grenade launcher in Lutsk, the author shows how a single hooligan attack in an atmosphere of ethnic tensions can lead to a total knock-out of the diplomatic system of the country. The research reveals the causes, parties and goals of the conflict, as well as subjects interested in ethnic tensions. It is shown how the problems of Polish- Ukrainian relations related to the secret change in the foreign policy course of the Republic of Poland in 2008 created a “synergy” with the growth of nationalist sentiment in Europe and the expansion of Russian influence. The link between the strengthening of nationalist movements and ethno-cultural conflicts in Europe (including the appeal of patriotic youth to their memory of historical conflicts) with the proliferation of pro-Russian and anti-globalist conspiracy propaganda in popular corners of the Internet, including those directed against the processes of European integration and NATO enlargement, have been shown in the research. The research suggests ways to prevent the escalation of conflict using the examples of both the diplomacy of the President of Ukraine and initiatives of representatives of civil society. The topic of Internet propaganda as a factor of ethnic tensions and rising political movements, as well as the distortion of history in such propaganda, is proposed by the author for future research.

The books under review deal with two towns in Galicia, territory that was part of the Habsburg Empire from 1772 until 1918. The first town, Brzezany, is located today in the Ukraine; the second, Jaśliska, a small town, is now in Poland. Despite different starting points, both books attempt to solve the riddle of the past and present relations between Jews and their neighbors, relations that are noted for their ambivalence and complexity.

The article substantiates the conditions of Russia’s revival as a world power. The necessity of conducting social and humanitarian research and allocating budget funds for these purposes is reinforced. Considerable attention is paid to the problems in Russian-Ukrainian relations, related primarily to unification of Russia and the Ukraine during the Pereyaslavl Rada of 1654, which were not focused on in Soviet history and which has been given excessive attention in the recent history of the Ukraine, which ultimately contributed to worsening of relations between the two former fraternal republics. The article indicated the reasons why the Ukrainian landowners, despite severe oppression for national and religious reasons on the part of the Polish szlachta, did not very much seek to separate from the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and constantly betrayed Russia in its war with the Polish-Lithuanian state, including that for the Ukraine itself. Some forms of executions that the Poles applied to the rebelled Cossacks and peasants of the Ukraine are indicated, as well as some liberties of the Polish szlachta, which were so attractive to the Ukrainian landowners. The article shows the assessment of the Kobzar T.G. Shevchenko, which was given by him to the leader of the national liberation war of the Ukrainian people Bogdan Khmelnytsky, as well as his assessment of the decisions of the Pereyaslavl Rada.

Until recently, sports history has largely neglected Eastern Europe. Yet new research has shown that historians need to embrace a perspective from the periphery towards the centre, and reach beyond the paradigms of modernization, Sovietization, and the nation-state if Europe's sporting culture is to be fully understood. Focusing primarily on Poland, this article outlines three features peculiar to the region. First, it stresses the importance of trans-national spaces and networks as well as European sub-regions. Missing out on the initial phase of sport's internationalization due to lack of independence, the development of Polish sport was regionally distinct. Sports flourished in Habsburg-ruled Galicia (in Cracow and Lodz especially) under relatively liberal political authorities, but developed more slowly and under different influences elsewhere. Second, the prominence of rural Galicia, inhabited by traditional groups such as Ukrainian peasants or Chassidic Jews, shows that Polish sport did not evolve in line with modernization and industrialization. The relatively slow diffusion of sport in industrial centres such as Warsaw or Silesia contradicts the paradigm of modernization and the notion of East European backwardness. Third, sport history sheds light on phenomena such as multi-ethnicity, migration, integration or disintegration.

The article deals with the problematic aspects of nation-building processes in Ukraine at the present stage. A methodological basis is a comprehensive approach to problem analysis. The categories «nation», «Ukrainian nation», «Ukrainian people» are characterized. The main markers of national identity are identified among which: national consciousness, national interest, national territory, national idea, culture, language, history, common origin, religion. The nation was found to contain both ethnic, cultural and political components. From the dominance of one of these characteristics is formed in essence, an ethnic or political nation. The basic internal and external factors that negatively effecting nation-building processes in Ukraine are investigated. The internal ones include: lack of clear legislative criteria for inclusion in the ethnic community and real indicators of the ethnic composition of the Ukrainian people; loss of title ethnic identity based on linguistic marker; political speculation about the ethno-cultural features of the regions of Ukraine, linguistic and mental differences of the citizens of Ukraine; lack of an effective system of national-patriotic education and formation of national consciousness. External factors include: hybrid war of the Russian Federation against Ukraine, aimed at loss of territorial integrity and state sovereignty of Ukraine, aggravation of interethnic relations; intensive globalization processes that require new approaches to public policy on preserving and developing national identity; negative impact of information flows of foreign countries on the formation of information and cultural space of Ukraine; political and cultural expansion of neighboring countries (Hungary, Poland, Romania, Russia) into Ukraine, which goes beyond the support of their national minorities and poses a direct threat to Ukraine's national security. Keywords: ethnicity,nation, national identity, nationalization, Ukraine, Ukrainian nation, hybrid war.

The aim of the article is to analyze V. Kuchabsky's historical views on the process of creation of the West Ukrainian People's Republic of 1918-1921. In his works of the first half of the 1930s the scientist highlighted the internal situation of Ukraine, in particular its political and military conditions, and at the same time revealed international relations that had a determinative influence on the future of Ukrainian statehood: Poland and Russia, the Bolsheviks and counterrevolution, the tendency for a new revival of the Russian Empire and the tendency for its collapse, the situation in Central Europe, the Paris Peace Conference and the Eastern European policy of the Western powers. The most significant work of V. Kuchabskyi, "Western Ukraine in the struggle against Poland and Bolshevism in 1918–1923," is a historical study, which objectively reflects the national history without a shadow of tenderness and political inspiration. More than eighty years have passed since its writing, but it still influences on the development of historical science in Ukraine, remains critical for the study of problems associated with the topic. V. Kuchabskyi tried to find out the reason for Ukrainians to lose their own statehood. For the first time in the 14th century, when the Principality of Galicia–Volhynia was conquered by Poland. And then in the 18th century when the Cossack state was annexed by Russia. The desire of Ukrainians to restore the united and independent state failed due to unjustified orientations to Moscow, then to Poland and Turkey. A similar situation, according to the historian, occurred in 1918–1921: while the Ukrainians fought against the Bolsheviks and the White Army, the Poles struck them back, capturing Galicia and Volyn. By signing the Treaty of Riga in 1921, they wanted to restore the division of Ukraine of 1667. The scientist called on the Galician to leave the inter-party controversy and unite for positive creativity and self-organization, to make a lasting peace between themselves, because external factors are often non-reliable and have their own aims, directly opposite to Ukrainian. V. Kuchabskyi warned not to rely on the rapid fall of Bolshevism, relying on the intervention of the capitalist world. On his thought, the damage of this view was disorienting citizens, turning their attention away from what actually was a question of life and death for Ukraine. Estimating the Ukrainian Galician Army, V. Kuchabskyi believed that it could be organized and turned into regular combat power only through significant victories in an actively waged war. But the Ukrainians did not have such commanders, which would turn the mechanically assembled army into a single military organism by their inspiration. According to V. Kuchabskyi, the political experience of the Ukrainian state of 1918–1921 remained undervalued, although it would have been enough to educate a new generation of state-oriented thinkers, creative people. That is why he put the realization of the state idea in direct dependence on the level of the political culture of the masses. This meant that the Galician intellectuals had to get rid of the conservative passivity, which manifested itself in a narrow worldview, the weakness of the will, and spiritual laziness. Only in this case, the national elite will build a democratic state, which will provide conditions for the cultural development of the people, will guarantee equal political and economic rights. Keywords Western Ukraine, Eastern Galicia, Lviv, National Revolution, November Action, ZUNR, UHA, Stanislav, Ukrainian National Council.

Two main myths constitute the founding basis of popular Polish ethnic nationalism: first, that Poland-Lithuania was an early Poland, and second, that the partitioning powers at all times unwaveringly pursued policies of Germanization and Russification. In the former case, the myth appropriates a common past today shared by Belarus, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Ukraine. In the latter case, Polonization is written out of the picture entirely, as also are variations and changes in the polices of Germanization and Russification. Taken together, the two myths to a large degree obscure (and even falsify) the past, making comprehension of it difficult, if not impossible. This article seeks to disentangle the knots of anachronisms that underlie the Polish national master narrative, in order to present a clearer picture of the interplay between the policies of Germanization, Polonization, and Russification as they unfolded in the lands of the partitioned Poland-Lithuania during the long nineteenth century.

After the fall of communism in 1989–1991, Poland and Ukraine could have become partners in international, economic, and cultural fields. Yet despite many positive achievements, the contemporary Polish-Ukrainian cooperation did not fully develop. Among many reasons that slow down the Polish-Ukrainian rapprochement, historical memories seem to be especially detrimental. The remembrances of World War II are the most destructive. Both Poles and Ukrainians understand that the only way to change this situation is to study and discuss the common history. A list of works on Polish-Ukrainian relations during World War II is long. Yet most of these publications offer broad pictures and present Polish-Ukrainian relations in general or in particular regions, such as Volhynia (Wołyń) or Eastern Galicia. This microstudy, devoted to the town of Boryslav (Borysław) in the years 1939 to 1945, tries to show how the conflicts were born, how they became embedded in human memory, and, finally, how they were transformed into historical stereotypes. The text concentrates on the crucial moments of World War II in Boryslav and describes how Poles and Ukrainians reacted differently to the consecutive challenges and how these various reactions shaped their relationship. The article ends with a conclusion that the five years of the war tore apart the Poles and Ukrainians of Boryslav and the post-1945 iron Polish-Soviet border divided the both sides and created a situation in which World War II attitudes froze for a long time.

The article deals with travel guides in German language about current territory of Ukraine at the end of 19th – first half of 20th centuries. It is noted that they represent quite a small group of literary sources. Major part of their content is reference information about geography, history, specific features of daily life and household traditions of one region or another, but major function is imposing of normative perception of foreign, alien culture. The most well-known are those, which were issued by publishing house “Baedeker”, as well as those, published in the times of Austrian-Hungarian monarchy. The author analyses image of Jews as ethnic community in the regions of Eastern Galicia and so-called Great Ukraine before the First World War, in the interwar period and during the Second World War. It is emphasized that thorough consideration of image of the Jews through prism of travel guides during dramatic and tragic events of the end of XIX – the first half of XX centuries may open to the readers of the XXI century new perspectives in understanding of such socio-political phenomena, as a state policy towards ethnic minorities; collective auto- and hetero-stereotypes; dynamics of antisemitism from common level of everyday life to discrimination and extermination of Jews. Moreover, travel guides contain various materials for analysis of issues, related to cultural transfer, models of journeys, attractiveness of certain destinations and objects of cultural and historical heritage at the territory of regions, which for centuries were known by coexistence of various ethnic groups and frequent changes of borders. Necessity of usage of interdisciplinary approach was an additional stimulus for research on the subject under consideration. The author stressed that the book of Franz Obermeyer “Ukraine. Land der schwarzen Erde”, as well as the travel guide by Baedeker, 1943, and the travel guide for Kyiv, 1942, were instruments of the criminal Nazi-Propaganda, contrary to publications during Austrian-Hungarian monarchy, which to certain measure can be considered as a source of knowledge about inter-cultural communications and tolerance. But in both cases the character of these books depended on a political and ideological conjuncture. While in the books, published before the WWI, the image of a Jew was presented mainly from the ethnographic perspective, but in Nazi publications during WWII it was transformed into the image of an enemy. But the authors avoided usage of formulations like “judo-bolshevism” or “worldwide Jewish conspiracy”. Most likely, the traditional format of a travel guide as an instrument of inter-cultural communication limited its actual transformation into a primitive racial or anti-Semitic propaganda. Certain attention in the article is given to the soviet travel guides, edited by Alexander Rado and published by All-Union Society of Cultural Relations in the 1920-ies, which were and are still little known.

This article is part of the special cluster titled Conceptualizations of the Holocaust in Germany, Lithuania, Poland, and Ukraine since the 1990s, guest edited by Grzegorz Rossoliński-Liebe. The Holocaust is the darkest page of Lithuanian history: Nearly the whole Jewish community in Lithuania was destroyed, while a part of ethnic Lithuanians participated in this destruction. This article discusses three layers and periods of the Holocaust in Lithuania that have made a considerable impact on the perception of this traumatic period in Lithuanian society. The first period deals with the Lithuanian–Jewish relations during the German occupation in Lithuania (1941–1944). The second one is related to the Soviet reoccupation of Lithuania and discussions among Lithuanian émigrés in the West (1944–1990), which shaped the history of the Holocaust in Lithuania from the ideological (Soviet) and defensive (Lithuanian émigré) perspectives. The final part of this article discusses the historiography and Holocaust memory in independent Lithuania after the 1990s. Almost thirty years of independence mark not only the re-creation of some old myths and stereotypes in Lithuania, but also new groundbreaking and open discussions in society, concerning the perception of this dark page of Lithuanian history.

The editorial board continues to publish the most significant documents, which characterize the status and progress of the Ukrainian national liberation movement, its vision in other countries in the early 20th century. The documents from the first book «Events in Ukraine 1914–1922 their importance and historical background» were published in Volume 39 of the Scientific journal. We publish the papers from the second book in current volume. We have selected 10 documents that chronologically cover the period from January 17 to May 9, 1918, and reproduce the vision of the Ukrainian problem by the ruling circles of Austro-Hungarian Empire and Germany, as well as the efforts of Ukrainian public-political figures aimed at the election of Ukraineʼs independence, reproduce the atmosphere of negotiations in Brest-Litovsk. The Austrian drafts of the imperial manifesto on the occasion of the peace treaty with Ukraine and the protocols of meetings of the German, Austrian and Ukrainian delegations during the preparation of the peace treaty are presented as the first 4 documents. The text of the Brest-Litovsk Peace Treaty signed on 9February, 1918 is the fifth document. The following five documents characterize the attitude of Soviet Russia and Poland to the provisions of the Treaty, as well as Germany’s attitude to the state affiliation of the Kholmshchyna. These documents will be useful for both students and researchers of international relations and history of Ukraine in the early 20th century. Whereas we have selected documents from different parts of the book, we stored their serial numbers. Page numbers are shown in square brackets after the text. The language, style of the headings and captions, cursive and text selection are all preserved. Also, for convenience of possible use by interested persons, we submit to them a list of abbreviations from the second book in the original. Keywords: Austro-Hungarian Empire, Brest-Litovsk peace treaty, Galicia, Germany, Ukraine, The Ukrainian Peopleʼs Republic, Ukrainian national movement, Ukrainians, Kholmshchyna.

Modern Europe suffers from political instability which is caused by Russian foreign policy above all. The complex nature of the Russian Federation's efforts in order to instrumentalize the divide etimperaprinciple is becoming increasingly apparent. Killing the wedge between the European powers is a guarantee of the lack of consensus in the decision making in response to the aggressive and dangerous behavior of Moscow in the global dimension (Crimea annexation, aggression in the East of Ukraine, support of B. Assad in Syria and the formation of uncontrolled waves of migration, interference with the electoral process in the USA, chemical attack in Salisbury, UK, a permanent blockage of the work of the UN Security Council etc.). Unfortunately, at the level of bilateral relations, there are also attempts to disperse neighboring states, in particular on ethnonational grounds (frequent provocations involving Russian special services in the border towns of Ukraine, Poland, and Hungary). In this regard, the problem of ensuring ethnopolitical stability in the region becomes extremely relevant, and even more vital. It is worth noting that Ukraine not only offers the study of its own experience for the development of a common policy in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe; Ukrainian scientists carry out comprehensive conceptual studies on ethnopolitical stability and the ways to ensure it, making their work useful for the European community. The problem of ethnopolitical stability is of great practical importance not only for Ukraine but also for Moldova. The neighbouring state has been suffering from the targeted actions of the Russian Federation since 1992, which uses the peculiarities of the ethnic composition of Moldova, its history and the language issue for producing an ethnopolitical destabilization’s zone on the border with Ukraine. Obviously, Moldova (as well as Ukraine) faces (and will face) a lot of difficulties, including ethnopolitical in its path towards EU. However, the clear crystallization of national interests, the understanding of these national interests by the general public will be a reliable fence in the inspiration of ethnopolitical instability, both in Moldova and in Ukraine. Keywords: ethnicity, ethnopolitical stability, new institutionalism, instrumentalization, Central and Eastern Europe

The purpose of this article is to investigate the use of the term “Western Ukraine” / “Western Ukrainian lands” as a “basic/key concept” in the discourse of Lviv’s newspaper “Dilo” and the environment of the Ukrainian National Democratic Union (UNDO) in 1923–1939.The study applies the methodology of “conceptual history” (Begriffsgeschichte) according to R. Koselleck and J. Ifversen. The article focuses on a specific aspect of the use of this term, namely its “nationalizing” function in the context of relations with the Polish state. For a broader comparative context, the article also briefly describes Ukrainian nationalistic, Polish, and Soviet discourses, as well as transcripts of sessions of the Sejm of the Polish Republic.The article shows that after the Entente Council of Ambassadors’ decision of 1923 to recognize the sovereignty of the Second Polish Republic over Eastern Galicia, the term “Western Ukraine” acquired a new geographical meaning in Ukrainian national and Soviet discourses, denoting the territory of all Ukrainian lands in Poland. Simultaneously, with the postulate of “autonomy of the western Ukrainian lands”, this term regained its political tone.The article shows that the term “Western Ukrainian lands” was used to emphasize the national character of the Ukrainian territories of Poland, to oppose it to the policy of the Polish state, and to connect this area with Greater / Soviet Ukraine.Because of such political connotation, this term provoked a sharp controversy between the Ukrainian and Polish discourses, in particular within the parliament. At the same time, with the change of political orientation in the 1930s, the use of the term “Western Ukrainian lands” in the political declarations of the UNDO and “Dilo” gradually decreased.The study concludes that the term “Western Ukrainian lands” became a “basic / key” concept in the interwar Ukrainian discourse and contained certain political connotations. This term’s “nationalizing” function and its sharp discursive role have led to the gradual refusal of its use at the highest political level.Key words: Western Ukraine, UNDO, Dilo newspaper, Second Polish Republic, interwar period, conceptual history. Метою цієї статті є дослідити вживання терміна «Західна Україна» / «західноукраїнські землі» як «базового/ключового поняття» у дискурсі львівської газети «Діло» та середовища Українського національно-демократич-ного об’єднання (УНДО) у 1923–1939 рр.У статті застосовано методологію «історії понять» (conceptual history / Begriffsgeschichte) за Р. Козелеком та Я. Іфверсеном. Стаття зосереджується на конкретному аспекті вживання цього терміна, а саме його «націоналізуючої» функції в контексті відносин із польською державою. Для ширшого порівняльного контексту у статті коротко залучено також український націоналістичний, польський та радянський дискурси, а також застосовано стенограми засідань Сейму Польської республіки.Стаття демонструє, що після рішення Ради послів Антанти про визнання суверенітету Польської республіки над Східною Галичиною в 1923 р. термін «Західна Україна» в українському національному, а також радянському, дискурсах набув нового географічного наповнення, позначаючи простір всіх українських земель Польщі. Водночас із висуненням постулату про «автономію західноукраїнських земель» цей термін знову набув політичного звучання.У статті показано, що поняття «західноукраїнські землі» використовували з метою підкреслити національний характер українських територій Польщі, протиставити його політиці польської держави та пов’язати цей простір із Великою/Радянською Україною. Через таке змістове наповнення цей термін викликав гостру полеміку між українським та польським дискурсами, зокрема в стінах парламенту. Водночас зі зміною політичних орієнтацій у 1930-х рр. використання поняття «західноукраїнські землі» у політичних деклараціях УНДО та «Діла» поступово зменшувалось.Дослідження доходить висновку, що термін «західноукраїнські землі» став «базовим/ключовим» поняттям в міжвоєнному українському дискурсі і ніс певні політичні конотації. Саме ця його «націоналізуюча» функція та спричинена нею гостра дискурсивна роль цього терміна стала причиною поступової відмови від його використання на вищому політичному рівні.Ключові слова: Західна Україна, УНДО, газета «Діло», Польська республіка, міжвоєнний період, історія понять.

The article researches the essence and content of multicultural pedagogical paradigms common in the world practice. Thus, J. Benx's pedagogical model is understood as a continuous process that requires long-term investments of time and effort, as well as carefully planned actions and monitoring. L. Frazierer's pedagogical concept is aimed at the development of cultural diversity through the introduction of specially designed methodological materials into the educational practices and a special procedure of this material submission. U. Hunter offers multicultural education through the establishment of structural educational priorities, in which the emphasis is shifted towards cultural pluralism and the maintenance of the cultural heritage of disappearing ethnic groups. In the concept of B. Parekh, the content of pedagogical multicultural practices, first of all, is freedom in the study of other cultures, acquainting students with different models of historic knowledge through the use of the entire world cultural heritage. The content of multicultural education for K. Grant is the approval and popularization of an alternative lifestyle for all people on the basis of equality of education and ensuring the availability of knowledge of all cultural diversity. B. Sizemor under multicultural education understands the assimilation of knowledge about various groups and organizations that counteract the oppression and exploitation by studying the realities and ideas which result from their work. S. Nieto considers multicultural education as the pedagogical process aimed at counteracting all forms of discrimination, deepening of interpersonal contacts between pupils and students, spreading the principles of democracy and social justice in the pedagogical process.From the socio-philosophical standpoint, the analysis of the prospects of introducing elements of multicultural pedagogical models into the domestic educational space of the educational institutions as an instrument of tolerance of intercultural relations between Ukraine and Poland is conducted.The problem of the emergence of intercultural contradictions in the context of the existence of the historical memory of separate individuals and the nation as a source of conflict is considered. The priority directions of practical implementation of elements of multicultural pedagogy in the sphere of education, family, church, activity of cultural and educational centers, public associations, mass media with the aim of establishing intercultural dialogue and tolerance of relations between bearers of different cultural traditions are determined.

In the course research the problems of the common political history of Ukraine, Poland and Lithuania were comprehended, first of all, the influence of the Slavic world on the process of formation of the Lithuanian state, mutual influences of historical and cultural nature. The article focuses on the cultural interethnic contacts of Lithuanians and Ukrainians. Linguistic interethnic contacts, Lithuanian-Ukrainian interactions in family and marriage traditions of Ukrainians are revealed. Within the frameworks of the study the language situation was described. It can be argued that the Rus influence was stronger here, because the so-called “Rus language” was used both in everyday life and in official records. But it posed difficulties in its linguistic interpretation, many variants for its nomination were suggested which was described in detail in the article. Numerous Lithuanians in modern Ukrainian lexicon representing various fields undoubtedly testifies to the importance of Lithuanian-Ukrainian contacts in the Middle Ages and the historical contribution of Lithuanians to the formation of the Ukrainian ethnic group. The reciprocity of Ukrainian-Lithuanian contacts is evidenced by numerous Ukrainian borrowings in the modern Lithuanian language, most of which undeniably entered the vocabulary during the time of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. A striking example of Lithuanian-Ukrainian interaction presents such a sphere of spiritual life as marital relations. After all, in the Ukrainian lands beginning from the XVI to the first half of the XIX century Lithuanian Statutes were in force (before the introduction of new Russian legislation), to which the norms of Russkaya Pravda regulating marital and family relations in the Kyiv state were transferred. Thus, Ukrainians got their own marriage and family traditions. The institution of marriage in the Lithuanian Statutes is considered quite extensively, but to a greater extent they regulated relations between the more affluent sections of the society at that time. Meanwhile, certain norms were universal: a clear definition of marriage age, defining the rights and responsibilities of parents and relatives in creating a new family, the obligations of the groom, determining the position of women and their children, and others.

Ключові слова: «Варшавська угода», «Союз Пілсудський–Петлюра», УНР, Симон Петлюра,Юзеф Пілсудський, «Київський похід». У статті проаналізовано передумови, процес і результати Варшавської угоди 1920 р. між Польщею іУНР, яка в польській історіографії названа «Союзом Пілсудський–Петлюра». Розкрито також зміствійськової конвенції, була підписана 24 квітня 1920 року і стала додатком до самого договору і являла собоютаємну угоду про надання військової та економічної допомоги УНР у спільній війні з Радянською Росією.Продовженням згаданих угод став фінансовий польсько-український договір від 9 серпня 1920 р. Польськавлада виконувала союзницькі обов’язки перед Україною й на міжнародній арені.Правове, політичне, фінансове і дипломатичне забезпечення Варшавського договору, названого пізніше«Союзом Пілсудський–Петлюра», відбувалося майже одночасно зі спільним антибільшовицьким походом наКиїв, який розпочався 25 квітня 1920 р.Отже, відносини між Польщею і УНР у 20-х роках ХХ ст. еволюціонували від взаємного протистояннядо співпраці. Серед найважливіших актів цього періоду слід назвати Варшавську угоду, військову конвенцію іспільний польсько-український похід на Київ. Так, були закладені традиції польсько-української співпраці, якізнайшли своє продовження в майбутньому. Посилання Vynnychenko, 1990 – Vynnychenko V. Vidrodzhennia natsii [Rebirth of the nation]. (Istoriia ukrainskoi revoliutsii[marets 1917 r. – hruden 1919 r.]). Chastyna III. Repryntne vidtvorennia vydannia 1920 roku. K., 1990. 542 s. [inUkrainian].Hud, 2006 – Hud B. Zahybel Arkadii. Etnosotsialni aspekty ukrainsko-polskykh konfliktiv KhIKh – pershoi polovynyKhKh stolit [The death of Arcadia. Ethno-social aspects of the Ukrainian-Polish conflicts of the 19th and the first halfof the 20th centuries]. Lviv, 2006. 448 s. [in Ukrainian].Hud, Holubko, 1997 – Hud B., Holubko V. Nelehka doroha do porozuminnia. Do pytannia genezy ukrainsko-polskohoviiskovo-politychnoho spivrobitnytstva 1917–1921 rr. [The road to understanding is not easy. On the question of thegenesis of Ukrainian-Polish military-political cooperation in 1917–1921]. Lviv, 1997. 65 s. [in Ukrainian].Dotsenko, 2001 – Dotsenko O. Zymovyi pokhid (6.XII.1919 – 6.V.1920) [Winter campaign (6.XII.1919 – 6.V.1920)].K., 2001. 375 s. [in Ukrainian].Kedryn, 1979 – Kedryn I. Sobornist. Z nahody 60-richchia Aktu 22 sichnia 1919 roku [Congregationalism. On theoccasion of the 60th anniversary of the Act of January 22, 1919] // Almanakh UNS [Ukrainskoho Narodnoho Soiuzu]. Ustorichchia narodzhennia Symona Petliury. Dzherzi Syti-Niu-York, 1979. № 69. S. 43–48. [in Ukrainian].Kolianchuk, 2000 – Kolianchuk O. Ukrainska viiskova emihratsiia u Polshchi (1920–1939) [Ukrainian militaryemigration in Poland (1920–1939)]: Dys... kand. ist. nauk: 20.02.22 / Derzhavnyi un-t «Lvivska politekhnika». Lviv,2000. 204 s. [in Ukrainian].Krasivskyi, 2000 – Krasivskyi O. Ya. Halychyna u pershii chverti KhKh st.: Problemy polsko-ukrainskykh stosunkiv[Galicia in the first quarter of the 20th century: Problems of Polish-Ukrainian relations]. Lviv, 2000. 416 s. [inUkrainian].Krasivskyi, 2008 – Krasivskyi O. Ya. Ukrainsko-polski vzaiemyny v 1917–1923 rr. [Ukrainian-Polish relations in1917–1923]. K., 2008. 544 s. [in Ukrainian].Lytvyn, 2000 – Lytvyn S. Vbyvstvo Petliury i HPU. Do istoriohrafii problemy [The murder of Petliura and the GPU. Tothe historiography of the problem] // Z arkhiviv VUChK–NKVD–KHB. 2000. № 2/4. S. 404–407. [in Ukrainian].Lytvyn, 2001 – Lytvyn S. Sud istorii: Symon Petliura i Petliuriana [Court of history: Simon Petlyura and Petlyuriana].K., 2001. 640 s. [in Ukrainian].Mazepa, 2003 – Mazepa I. Ukraina v ohni i buri revoliutsii 1917–1921 [Ukraine in the fire and storm of the revolution1917–1921]. K., 2003. 608 s. [in Ukrainian].Mandzenko, 1979 – Mandzenko K. Petliura, petliurivtsi, petliurivstvo. Do storichchia vid dnia narodzhennia Holovnohootamana Symona Petliury 1879–1979 [Petlyura, Petlyura people, Petlyuraism. To the centenary of the birth of ChiefAtaman Simon Petliura 1879–1979] // Almanakh UNS. U storichchia narodzhennia Symona Petliury. Dzherzi Syti–NiuYork , 1979. № 69. S. 9–21. [in Ukrainian].Rukkas, 2015 – Rukkas A. O. «Razom z polskym viiskom»: Armiia Ukrainskoi Narodnoi Respubliky 1920 r.(struktura, orhanizatsiia, chyselnist, uniforma) [Together with the «Polish army»: the Army of the Ukrainian People'sRepublic in 1920 (structure, organization, numbers, uniform)]. K., 2015. 480 s. [in Ukrainian].Sekretnoe sohlashenye… – Sekretnoe sohlashenye mezhdu pravytelstvom Polshy y petliurovskoi dyrektoryei ukraynskoi nezavysymoi respublyky o pryznanyy UNR y sotrudnychestve, zakliuchennoe 21.IV.1920 h. (fotokopyy)[Secret agreement... - Secret agreement between the government of Poland and the Petliura directory of the Ukrainianindependent republic on the recognition of the UNR and cooperation, concluded on April 21, 1920 (photocopies)]// Rossyiskyi hosudarstvennыi voennыi arkhyv (RHVA), f. 461/k, op. 2, d. 41. [in Russian].Stakhiv, 1966 – Stakhiv M. Ukraina v dobi Dyrektorii UNR [Ukraine in the era of the UNR Directory]. T. 7. Vykhid izkryzy. Skrenton, 1966. 431 s. [in Ukrainian].Tynchenko, 2007 – Tynchenko Ya. Ofitserskyi korpus Armii Ukrainskoi Narodnoi Respubliky (1917–1921) [OfficerCorps of the Army of the Ukrainian People's Republic (1917–1921)]. K., 2007. 536 s. [in Ukrainian].Shandruk, 2008 – Shandruk P. Syla doblesti [The power of valor]. Ivano-Frankivsk, 2008. 236 s. [in Ukrainian].Shelukhin, 1926 – Shelukhin S. Varshavskyi dohovir mizh poliakamy i S. Petliuroiu 21 kvitnia 1920 roku [The WarsawPact between the Poles and S. Petliura on April 21, 1920]. 2-e vyd. Praha, 1926. 40 s. [in Ukrainian].

This article explores the role played by the 1940 Katyń massacre in structuring foreign relations between post-communist Poland and Russia. In so doing, it offers a theoretical model through which to understand the combative politics over history that have burgeoned in Eastern and Central Europe after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Tracing how political discourse over the massacre has evolved from the late 1980s to the present, it examines the impact of exogenous influences and changing geopolitical realities on how this event is recalled within these two states, which exhibit markedly different relationships to their shared past. Questions of regime type, relative standing within the region, and how—as well as by whom—interstate discourse over contentious historical events is initiated are all central to the model of dispute origination developed herein, as is the presence of various institutional factors, chief among them membership in the supranational European Union (EU). A shadow study of Polish–Ukrainian relations concerning history, focusing on the mass killing of ethnic Poles that took place in Volhynia and eastern Galicia in the period 1943–1945, is also undertaken in order to illuminate the significant differences in how the past has been politically activated in relations between the respective post-Soviet dyads of Poland–Russia and Poland–Ukraine.

The present article offers a new framework for understanding the early East-European post-war that introduces and conceptualizes the idea of “Void Communities.” The core of the argument is that the disappearance of various groups of Others—ethnic, religious, and class—was one of the most important consequences of the Second World War for Central and Eastern Europe, and particularly for Poland and Ukraine. The Void left by those who had disappeared could be described on several levels, such as physical absence, social and economical dysfunctionality, transformation of the social structure and stratification, property transfer, decline of moral values and norms, and changes in local culture and traditions. Based on an extensive oral history research (of more than 150 interviews) and in-depth reading of ego-documents, the article prioritizes the first-hand perspective of witnesses and centres on those who remained in the post-war Void Communities after their neighbours had been murdered, deported, resettled, or encouraged to leave semi-voluntarily. While the paper primarily focuses on the historical region of Galicia, now divided between Poland and Ukraine, the source material used to analyze the framework for Void Communities includes documents associated with the entire pre-war Polish Second Republic.